Search
Close this search box.

Legal Expert Discusses Federal Court’s Role Between Appeals Deadline and Parliament Session

Baghdad: Legal expert and consultant, Salem Hawas, stated that the expiry of the Electoral Judicial Panel's deadline on 7 December 2025 moves the electoral process into a new constitutional phase, in which the responsibility for ratifying the election results falls to the Federal Supreme Court.

According to National Iraqi News Agency, Hawas explained that the Constitution does not specify a binding time limit for the Federal Supreme Court to ratify election results, unlike the deadlines stipulated in the Independent High Electoral Commission's law. He noted that this legal vacuum generates constitutional debate regarding the maximum period allowed for the Court to complete its procedures.

He pointed out that, pursuant to Article 94 of the Constitution, the Federal Supreme Court issues final and binding rulings without being restricted by a specific constitutional timeframe. This means that the timeline is discretionary rather than textually defined; constitutionally, it is open-ended, but in practice it should not exceed a 'reasonable period' that would undermine political stability or expose the country to a constitutional vacuum. He added that the Court usually completes its procedures within a few weeks after receiving complete appeals files.

Hawas further clarified that the ratification by the Federal Supreme Court constitutes the final step that directly precedes the referral of the decree to the President of the Republic, who, under Article 54 of the Constitution, is obligated to convene the Council of Representatives within fifteen days from the date of issuance of the ratification decree. He stressed that any delay in the Court's ratification would inevitably lead to a delay in the start of the parliamentary term, necessitating precise coordination among the Electoral Commission, the Electoral Judicial Panel, and the Federal Supreme Court.

The legal expert emphasized that the absence of an explicit constitutional provision does not mean the absence of responsibility. He called on the Federal Supreme Court to adopt a clear and appropriate timeframe starting from 7 December 2025, one that does not exceed the threshold that could threaten constitutional stability. He also stressed the importance of adhering to the legal sequence of deadlines from the announcement of results through their ratification, noting that completing the ratification within a reasonable period is the true guarantee for a safe transfer of power and for preventing any political or constitutional vacuum.